Republican senator announces support for gay marriage

[Cor_Cordis]

You can marry who you are attracted to and enjoy over 1000 benefits that come from the civil government. Many American citizens-who are not members of, nor committed to any faith-cannot. That’s what it’s based on. Not the Church, not the Bible. Civil law.

Oh, outstanding logic. So everyone has a “right” to “marry” based simply on their sexual attractions. Great.

In that case how do you deny the same “civil rights” for the incestuous couples? The polygamists? OR the pederasts and pedophiles once the legal age of “consent” is lowered (and rest assured it will be).

Group Of Psychiatrists Wants To Redefine Pedophilia To Promote Tolerance

But wait, same-sex couples originally claimed they simply wanted the same financial and family rights as heterosexual couples. But those rights could have easily been acquired through contractual means by specific legislation. Ah, but the SSM fascists moved the goal-post and went for the target they had always intended upon: The redefinition of marriage.

And why? Because this entire “rights” excuse is a charade. Their intended purpose all along was to destroy the religious liberties of traditional Christianity and to legislate mandated acceptance and advocacy by unconstitutional judicial activism.

 

[josh987654321]

Riiiiggght…just up until the time they demand Catholic hospitals, charities, schools, etc, offer same sex partner benefits, gay adoption…

catholicnewsagency.com/news/same-sex_marriage_law_forces_d.c._catholic_charities_to_close_adoption_program/

sj-r.com/top-stories/x123110829/Catholic-Charities-to-scale-back-services-but-keep-offices-open

washingtontimes.com/news/2006/mar/14/20060314-010603-3657r/

When opposing same sex marriage I often get the remark “Why do you care? this wont effect you” and here is evidence how it will effect me and many other good people.

It’s no different to when Rome attacked christianity, than the dumbarse emperor ‘Nero’ realised that alot of the people he relyed on were christian and since he had been removing christians from his society found he had no one left to run it lol, that’s how Rome collapsed. If they make it discrimination by law to refuse or oppose same sex marriages, than they will be “by law” making the bible discrimination, because the law of man means very little to christians.

Just like when Peter & John were before the council in ‘Acts’ they said “Do you think God wants us to do what you want, or what he wants?”

My sister who is also against homosexual marriage said when we told her that they would attack chrisitan organisations, if they discriminated against homosexuals, that “They can’t do that because we are entitled to our beliefs” so this just shows that they can and they will.

 

[Seeker1961]

Warning…this link is the Human Rights Campaign website. There are actually 1138 benefits. Most married people probably have no idea they have all of them…and the ones they do know about they probably take for granted. It’s not their fault, they are the majority. The majority never realizes how good they have it until a minority starts asking for the same thing.

hrc.org/resources/entry/an-overview-of-federal-rights-and-protections-granted-to-married-couples

And again…just so we’re clear. I AM NOT ADVOCATING CHANGING CHURCH TEACHING ON GAY MARRIAGE.

This is about civil law and civil law ONLY. People who aren’t Catholic and have no intention of ever being Catholic, but are American citizens who work hard, pay taxes and just want to have what other American citizens have without having to pay lawyers and jump through hoops to get it.

 

[Cor_Cordis]

Warning…this link is the Human Rights Campaign website. There are actually 1138 benefits. Most married people probably have no idea they have all of them…and the ones they do know about they probably take for granted. It’s not their fault, they are the majority. The majority never realizes how good they have it until a minority starts asking for the same thing.

hrc.org/resources/entry/an-overview-of-federal-rights-and-protections-granted-to-married-couples

And again…just so we’re clear. I AM NOT ADVOCATING CHANGING CHURCH TEACHING ON GAY MARRIAGE.

This is about civil law and civil law ONLY. People who aren’t Catholic and have no intention of ever being Catholic, but are American citizens who work hard, pay taxes and just want to have what other American citizens have without having to pay lawyers and jump through hoops to get it.

All those benefits can be provided for same-sex couples by contractual and legislative means without destroying marriage by redefining it. Except of course, those benefits granted to children. Since homosexuals cannot reproduce, they have no natural rights to those benefits.

And you may not be advocating change in Catholic moral doctrine, but that is precisely the kind of assault that the SSM fascists intend to inflict upon traditional Christianity.

And that is the main intention of their true motives.

 

[LisaA]

Warning…this link is the Human Rights Campaign website. There are actually 1138 benefits. Most married people probably have no idea they have all of them…and the ones they do know about they probably take for granted. It’s not their fault, they are the majority. The majority never realizes how good they have it until a minority starts asking for the same thing.

hrc.org/resources/entry/an-overview-of-federal-rights-and-protections-granted-to-married-couples

And again…just so we’re clear. I AM NOT ADVOCATING CHANGING CHURCH TEACHING ON GAY MARRIAGE.

This is about civil law and civil law ONLY. People who aren’t Catholic and have no intention of ever being Catholic, but are American citizens who work hard, pay taxes and just want to have what other American citizens have without having to pay lawyers and jump through hoops to get it.

Seeker the problem with your theory that you are not advocating changing church teaching is that no one thinks that is what you are doing anyway. You have spoken only of the secular and civil arrangements. You have provided exactly zero evidence that Church teaching is in dispute. So that strawman burned quickly.

What you fail to address is that it WILL impact our Church and other religious organizations, and not for the better. As Cor Cordis noted, the real impact will be the dimunition of religious liberty, whether intended by all homosexual marriage advocates or not.

I’ve already given numerous examples where homosexuals ginned up incidents in order to generate lawsuits when PRIVATE businesses and individuals refused demands they be accommodated even if it is against the individual’s or business owner’s conscious. In another case a counsellor who made it clear she would not work with homosexual couples because of her religious conscious and even tried to accommodate the request by a referral to another counsellor was sued. We have probably all heard about the eHarmony suit. eHarmony was set up to be a Christian match service and originally would not accept homosexuals looking for same sex partners. Again they were sued and while they may have prevailed, the company capitulated. This is deliberate and is but a preview of things to come.

The agenda is clear. They don’t come to build up their status, they are focused on destroying traditional values and religious liberty. I think in their heart of hearts this is the only way they can reconcile this destructive course of action. Like little children they feel justified in attacking Christian businesses and organizations and churches because “he hit me first!!!”

Lisa

 

[Cor_Cordis]

The agenda is clear. They don’t come to build up their status, they are focused on destroying traditional values and religious liberty. I think in their heart of hearts this is the only way they can reconcile this destructive course of action. Like little children they feel justified in attacking Christian businesses and organizations and churches because “he hit me first!!!”

Lisa

The strong correlation between homosexuality and narcissism is not incidental.

 

[Seeker1961]

Seeker the problem with your theory that you are not advocating changing church teaching is that no one thinks that is what you are doing anyway. You have spoken only of the secular and civil arrangements. You have provided exactly zero evidence that Church teaching is in dispute. So that strawman burned quickly.

What you fail to address is that it WILL impact our Church and other religious organizations, and not for the better. As Cor Cordis noted, the real impact will be the dimunition of religious liberty, whether intended by all homosexual marriage advocates or not.

I’ve already given numerous examples where homosexuals ginned up incidents in order to generate lawsuits when PRIVATE businesses and individuals refused demands they be accommodated even if it is against the individual’s or business owner’s conscious. In another case a counsellor who made it clear she would not work with homosexual couples because of her religious conscious and even tried to accommodate the request by a referral to another counsellor was sued. We have probably all heard about the eHarmony suit. eHarmony was set up to be a Christian match service and originally would not accept homosexuals looking for same sex partners. Again they were sued and while they may have prevailed, the company capitulated. This is deliberate and is but a preview of things to come.

The agenda is clear. They don’t come to build up their status, they are focused on destroying traditional values and religious liberty. I think in their heart of hearts this is the only way they can reconcile this destructive course of action. Like little children they feel justified in attacking Christian businesses and organizations and churches because “he hit me first!!!”

Lisa

It wasn’t a straw man…I’ve been accused of saying that church teaching should change many times so I wanted to avoid that again.

The thing is, gay marriage is here. It’s already legal in several states and the churches in those states seem to be doing just fine. Private individuals and businesses are not churches, they have to make their own choices about operating under civil law. For every cake baker that doesn’t want to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple, there’s another one that’s happy to take their money. It’s not something that’s coming and can be stopped-it’s already here.

 

[Havard]

I’ll bite, Seeker. From a purely secular standpoint, what would you say the government interest is in giving married couples extra rights that it does not extend to unmarried people?

 

[Seeker1961]

I’ll bite, Seeker. From a purely secular standpoint, what would you say the government interest is in giving married couples extra rights that it does not extend to unmarried people?

Commerce. Married couples are more stable, two incomes are better than one when it comes to having disposable income for things like houses, cars, dinners out, furniture, show tickets…you think all these corporations are lining up behind gay marriage because they just love gay people? They love gay people’s money. And the government loves anything that has to do with money, because the more money people make, the more tax dollars they get.

The first rule of government is “follow the money.”

Oh…you thought it had to do with children?? Funny, people with kids spend a lot of money too, don’t they?

 

[LisaA]

It wasn’t a straw man…I’ve been accused of saying that church teaching should change many times so I wanted to avoid that again.

The thing is, gay marriage is here. It’s already legal in several states and the churches in those states seem to be doing just fine. *** Private individuals and businesses are not churches, they have to make their own choices about operating under civil law. For every cake baker that doesn’t want to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple, there’s another one that’s happy to take their money***. It’s not something that’s coming and can be stopped-it’s already here.

But that is the point and the one you fail to see in your defense of homosexuals’ selfish desires. For the B&B that didn’t want to accommodate the two Lesbians there were many more happy to take their money and show them great hospitality. For every wedding photographer who didn’t want to photograph a gay wedding there are dozens more who’d love to have the gig. For every counsellor that turns away a homosexual couple there are dozens happy to work with them.

But that didn’t matter! These people were still sued. They had to deal with the expense, the wasted time, the negative media spin. Do you not see the real agenda? Not everyone mind you but the loudest voices, the activists, those who harrass businesses and individuals because they don’t believe in homosexul marriage, those are the ones whose real goal is tearing down tradition, harassing those who disagree, ginning up lawsuits, and working toward instability in our society.

As to “it’s already here…” maybe so but there are many destablizing forces of destruction in society and that they exist is no reason to give up pushing back against them.

Lisa

 

[Cor_Cordis]

It wasn’t a straw man…I’ve been accused of saying that church teaching should change many times so I wanted to avoid that again.

The thing is, gay marriage is here. It’s already legal in several states and the churches in those states seem to be doing just fine. Private individuals and businesses are not churches, they have to make their own choices about operating under civil law. For every cake baker that doesn’t want to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple, there’s another one that’s happy to take their money. It’s not something that’s coming and can be stopped-it’s already here.

It’s only a matter of time before traditional Christian doctrines will be deemed “hate speech”. Soon followed by a repeal of the Church’s tax-exempt status. And then quickly followed by endless audits and never ending tax increase. That is, until the “hateful” “bigoted” Christians get their minds right.

And please, don’t even delude yourself and say it won’t happen. It’s a certainty.

 

[Seeker1961]

It’s only a matter of time before traditional Christian doctrines will be deemed “hate speech”. Soon followed by a repeal of the Church’s tax-exempt status. And then quickly followed by endless audits and never ending tax increase. That is, until the “hateful” “bigoted” Christians get their minds right.

And please, don’t even delude yourself and say it won’t happen. It’s a certainty.

While you’re predicting the future, can you get me the lottery numbers?

 

[Seeker1961]

But that is the point and the one you fail to see in your defense of homosexuals’ selfish desires. For the B&B that didn’t want to accommodate the two Lesbians there were many more happy to take their money and show them great hospitality. For every wedding photographer who didn’t want to photograph a gay wedding there are dozens more who’d love to have the gig. For every counsellor that turns away a homosexual couple there are dozens happy to work with them.

But that didn’t matter! These people were still sued. They had to deal with the expense, the wasted time, the negative media spin. Do you not see the real agenda? Not everyone mind you but the loudest voices, the activists, those who harrass businesses and individuals because they don’t believe in homosexul marriage, those are the ones whose real goal is tearing down tradition, harassing those who disagree, ginning up lawsuits, and working toward instability in our society.

As to “it’s already here…” maybe so but there are many destablizing forces of destruction in society and that they exist is no reason to give up pushing back against them.

Lisa

Seems like there is some selfishness on both sides. Both sides want it their way or no way.

However, what is going to have to happen is both sides are going to have to learn how to co-exist, just like they did with divorce.

 

[fix]

Warning…this link is the Human Rights Campaign website. There are actually 1138 benefits. Most married people probably have no idea they have all of them…and the ones they do know about they probably take for granted. It’s not their fault, they are the majority. The majority never realizes how good they have it until a minority starts asking for the same thing.

hrc.org/resources/entry/an-overview-of-federal-rights-and-protections-granted-to-married-couples

And again…just so we’re clear. I AM NOT ADVOCATING CHANGING CHURCH TEACHING ON GAY MARRIAGE.

This is about civil law and civil law ONLY. People who aren’t Catholic and have no intention of ever being Catholic, but are American citizens who work hard, pay taxes and just want to have what other American citizens have without having to pay lawyers and jump through hoops to get it.

Church teaching is that Catholics are obligated to oppose homosexual unions.

 

[LisaA]

The strong correlation between homosexuality and narcissism is not incidental.

Of course not. It’s adults’ selfish desires that create havoc. Peel back these groups’ outer facade of “civil rights” and you find a self centered focus on what “I” want, not because it’s good for the current and future generations but because I want what I want because I want it.

BTW did you know that $1.5 Million dollars in taxpayer funds went to find out why Lesbians have a very high incidence of obesity? Oddly enough gay males are less likely to be obese than straight males.

What a revelation, just look around. I could have told you that and donated the 1.5 Million to the Church.

Lisa

 

[Cor_Cordis]

While you’re predicting the future, can you get me the lottery numbers?

I’ll do you one better, I’ll gladly welcome you to my state where Catholic Charities was swiftly ran out of the adoption business recently by the state’s massive financial penalties brought on by the Church’s refusal to adopt children to gay couples. So now the 20% of all adoptions that the Church provided have simply been vanquish.

Apparently the children aren’t as important as the Left’s political agenda.

The future on this issue isn’t exactly difficult to predict. The political trajectory is already entrenched. It’s only a matter of time.

 

[fix]

Precisely! This is the same pattern of lies that brought us no fault divorce and abortion. The focus is entirely on the adults and their selfish desires. Not happy? Divorce because the next guy or gal out there WILL surely make you “happy.” Who cares that the kids don’t have a mommy or a daddy. Don’t want a baby? Oh just get rid of the problem.

No thought of what impact on society, as you said on other families and other children, on school curricula, and what distresses me the most, the impact on regligious liberty.

Lisa

It is selfish.

 

[Seeker1961]

Of course not. It’s adults’ selfish desires that create havoc. Peel back these groups’ outer facade of “civil rights” and you find a self centered focus on what “I” want, not because it’s good for the current and future generations but because I want what I want because I want it.

BTW did you know that $1.5 Million dollars in taxpayer funds went to find out why Lesbians have a very high incidence of obesity? Oddly enough gay males are less likely to be obese than straight males.

What a revelation, just look around. I could have told you that and donated the 1.5 Million to the Church.

Lisa

I’m with you on the 1.5 million, but we could spend all night talking about wasteful government research and how that money could be better spent.

 

[fix]

I heard a quote not long ago that 40 years ago, laws were made from the perspective of what’s best for the children, the generation we’re raising; and over the past 40 years there’s been a shift in attitude toward making laws based on what adults want, with the assumption that kids are ‘flexible’ and will be just fine.

Here’s just one story of growing up in a lesbian household: thepublicdiscourse.com/2012/08/6065/

There’s a book out by a woman, on the same topic. She very much disapproves of same-sex parenting, as a result of her experiences. Unfortunately, I can’t remember the name of the book, but maybe someone here knows it.

Of course, we all know that the liberal ‘listen to our experiences’ line is going to become suddenly mute when faced with the experiences of the children being raised this way, as they become adults and speak against it.

Children are seen as commodities.

 

[Cor_Cordis]

Seems like there is some selfishness on both sides. Both sides want it their way or no way.

However, what is going to have to happen is both sides are going to have to learn how to co-exist, just like they did with divorce.

What new discovery made the observable dysfunction of homosexuality suddenly “normal” and “natural”?

And how can you deny all the other dysfunctional relationships their “civil rights”?